Urbanization and economic development in the Philippines: some implications for regional policy.
E M Pernia
Abstract
E M Pernia
Abstract
The paper analyzes urbanization in the context of population growth, migration, and economic development. It suggests that the process of national urbanization decelerated in the post-war period due to the acceleration of population growth in the rural sector, stagnant agricultural productivity, and capital-intensive industialization. The common concern about rapid urbanization due to massive rural-to-urban migration would seem to be better directed to the unremitting movement of population to the metropolitan region and the consequent widening disparities between this region and all the other regions. The major determinants of rural-urban population shifts appear to be socioeconomic development factors in both rural and urban sectors rather than demographic pressure in rural areas, suggesting that rural development may not be considered as an antidote to urbanization. Rather, it implies that rural development along with a purposive and well-designed industrial location strategy can make important contributions to a policy of more balanced urbanization. Although rural demographic pressure may not have been effective as yet in unleashing population, it may well be so in the near future as land frontiers disappear and rural density limits are reached. A serious regional development policy is, therefore, needed so that potential massive population flows can be re-routed to areas other than the metropolitan region.
A significance statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
The paper analyzes urbanization in the context of population growth, migration, and economic development. It suggests that the process of national urbanization decelerated in the post-war period due to the acceleration of population growth in the rural sector, stagnant agricultural productivity, and capital-intensive industialization. The common concern about rapid urbanization due to massive rural-to-urban migration would seem to be better directed to the unremitting movement of population to the metropolitan region and the consequent widening disparities between this region and all the other regions. The major determinants of rural-urban population shifts appear to be socioeconomic development factors in both rural and urban sectors rather than demographic pressure in rural areas, suggesting that rural development may not be considered as an antidote to urbanization. Rather, it implies that rural development along with a purposive and well-designed industrial location strategy can make important contributions to a policy of more balanced urbanization. Although rural demographic pressure may not have been effective as yet in unleashing population, it may well be so in the near future as land frontiers disappear and rural density limits are reached. A serious regional development policy is, therefore, needed so that potential massive population flows can be re-routed to areas other than the metropolitan region.
Key concepts: Urbanization, Metropolitan area, Population, Economic growth, Development economics, Geography, Rural area, Context (archaeology)